The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1887-10-21
THE COURT RECORD.
Supreme Court Decisions.


1855 Frederick p. Rush Ell al. vs. James W.
Thompson, Marion S. G. Reversed. Collars
G. jim ar action by three partners on an ac-
count, the defendants may answer that only two
of the plaintiffs were members of the firm and
had any interest n the cause of action or to
whom they were in any way debted, and they
may set up as against those plaintiffs whatever
defense or claim they had by way OF set-off or
counter-claim. e. An answer in such case al
]eging that the two members OF the firm repro
sented that they were the only members of the
firm. and that other person had any interest
in it, and praying that any amount that be
found due said two members and equal
amount found due defendants be set off, etc, is
bad. In the absence OF bad faith the third mem
Der could not be deprived Of his interest by the
statement of bis partners without his knowledge
consent. There is mutually in such a
setoff. 1t is not valid. 81 Where a para
graph of answer pleads a set-off, and is errone
neously struck out, if there is paragraph left
standing under which proof of that character
could be introduced. the error is not a harmless
one. The proof would not be admissible under
the general denial.
1905 Lake Shore etc Railroad Company ys.
Abner F. Pinchin. DeKalb c. G. Reversed.
Elliott. 1.-THE facts that appellee was in
jured while attempting to pass between two coal
cars forming part of train standing across
streer. He knew the train through
freight. and he stopped within a few feet OF it
several minutes before he attempted to pass be-
tween the cars He did not look to whether
engine attached to the train or not.
When he got between the cars he stood on the
draw bars, and when injured he had his hands
DrRclnR DlmS6I between Inc cars. Wueu ne
attempted to pass through he had pen.knife
and cane in his hands, and was whiting
stick. These he placed on the end of one of the
cars After he got between the cars he closed
bis knife and put it in his pocket No notice
was given by him OF his intention to pass
through the train, and no one knew it, and he
would not have made the attern pt except for what
man told him whom he took to De a brakeman
Held, That the facts a matter of law consti-
tuted negligence. and would defeat appellse's
recovery.
1896 Isaac SNYDER va Aaron Click Elkhart
G. G. Reversed. Howk, J.-When the guaranty
is direct and certain and the thing guaranteed
is definite in it's amount and known to the
guarantor, might have been known to him,
by the exercise of ordinary care at the time the
guaranty given, notice of the acceptance of
such guaranty need not have been given in
order to render it binding on the euarantor. The
failure to give notice and resulting damages
were matters of defense. There is evidence
showing damages for failure to give timely no.
tice.
1904 Charles z. Jones Vs. State, ex rel.
Snodgrass. Delaware G. c. Affirmed. Mitch
ell. Wv hen an information in the nature OF
quo warranto contains statement of all the
facts essential to constitute cause of action,
although such facts may be stated in general,
underlined ambiguous terms, it is nevertheless
good on demurrer. r. By the act of 1885, county
commissioners holding, at the the time of its
passage, whose terms were confused and wrong
fully encroached upon, and whose successors
the time of beginning service. Commissioners
elect crowded out by encroachment, hold
three years from the time they are entitled to
begin.
1860. Ozas Nettis vs. John n. Zurrin. Jen-
nings, G. c. Dismissed.